BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure expert witness Anaheim California high-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California townhome construction expert witness Anaheim California low-income housing expert witness Anaheim California office building expert witness Anaheim California institutional building expert witness Anaheim California custom home expert witness Anaheim California mid-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California industrial building expert witness Anaheim California retail construction expert witness Anaheim California structural steel construction expert witness Anaheim California hospital construction expert witness Anaheim California housing expert witness Anaheim California custom homes expert witness Anaheim California Medical building expert witness Anaheim California landscaping construction expert witness Anaheim California tract home expert witness Anaheim California casino resort expert witness Anaheim California condominiums expert witness Anaheim California production housing expert witness Anaheim California multi family housing expert witness Anaheim California concrete tilt-up expert witness Anaheim California
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Anaheim, California

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB800 (codified as Civil Code §§895, et seq) is the most far-reaching, complex law regulating construction defect litigation, right to repair, warranty obligations and maintenance requirements transference in the country. In essence, to afford protection against frivolous lawsuits, builders shall do all the following:A homeowner is obligated to follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the homeowner by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. A failure by a homeowner to follow these obligations, schedules, and practices may subject the homeowner to the affirmative defenses.A builder, under the principles of comparative fault pertaining to affirmative defenses, may be excused, in whole or in part, from any obligation, damage, loss, or liability if the builder can demonstrate any of the following affirmative defenses in response to a claimed violation:


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211
    http://www.desertchapter.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501


    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biasc.org

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biaoc.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
    http://www.biabuild.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355


    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

    California Court of Appeal Holds That the Right to Repair Act Prohibits Class Actions Against Manufacturers of Products Completely Manufactured Offsite

    A License to Sue: Appellate Court Upholds Condition of Statute that a Contracting Party Must Hold a Valid Contractor’s License to Pursue Action for Recovery of Payment for Contracting Services

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    The Colorado Supreme Court holds that loans made to a construction company are not subject to the Mechanic’s Lien Trust Fund Statute

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    U.S. Housing Starts Exceed Estimates After a Stronger December

    Sanctions Issued for Frivolous Hurricane Sandy Complaint Filed Against Insurer

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    California Court Confirms Broad Coverage Under “Ongoing Operations” Endorsements

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Builders Beware: Smart Homes Under Attack by “Hide ‘N Seek” Botnet

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    Taylor Morrison v. Terracon and the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Slump in U.S. Housing Starts Led by Multifamily: Economy

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Let the 90-Day Countdown Begin

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    Meet the Hipster Real Estate Developers Building for Millennials

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California

    CSLB’s Military Application Assistance Program

    Florida “Property Damage” caused by an “Occurrence” and “Your Work” Exclusion

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Mid-Session Overview of Colorado’s 2017 Construction Defect Legislation

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    Designers George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg Discuss One57’s Ultra-Luxury Park Hyatt

    Trump Administration Issues Proposed 'Waters of the U.S.' Rule

    Project-Specific Commercial General Liability Insurance

    ‘Like a War Zone’: Malibu Fire Ravages Multimillion-Dollar Homes

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded as Part of "Damages Because of Property Damage"

    National Demand Increases for Apartments, Refuting Calls for Construction Defect Immunity in Colorado

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    August Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Appreciate at Faster Pace

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2017

    Call Me Maybe? . . . Don’t Waive Your Rights Under the Right to Repair Act’s Prelitigation Procedures

    Breaking Down Homeowners Association Laws In California

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    With over 4500 engineering, construction, and builders standard of care related expert designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory provides a single point of reference for construction defect and claims related support to construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction related trial support and expert consulting services to the industry's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, real estate investment trusts, risk managers, owners, as well as a variety of municipalities and government offices. Utilizing captive resources which comprise construction standard of care consultants, registered architects, professional engineers, and credentialed building envelope experts, the firm brings specialized expertise and local capabilities to the Anaheim region.

    Anaheim California architectural engineering expert witnessAnaheim California engineering consultantAnaheim California concrete expert witnessAnaheim California expert witnesses fenestrationAnaheim California expert witness structural engineerAnaheim California roofing construction expertAnaheim California soil failure expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Industry Practices Questioned After Girder Fractures at Salesforce Transit Center

    April 10, 2019 —
    Attendees of a recent presentation on the earthquake-resistant structure of San Francisco’s Salesforce Transit Center—intended to provide a safe haven when the Big One hits—lauded the engineering of the 4.5-block-long hollow tube that supports the 1.2-million-sq-ft “groundscraper.” But there also was much talk of the project’s black eye, as a consequence of brittle fractures of the bottom flanges of two bridge-like built-up plate girders that span 87 ft over Fremont Street. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    May 13, 2019 —
    As regular readers of Construction Law Musings are well aware, I like to discuss mechanic’s liens. Whether it is their picky nature, the way court’s treat them or the soon to take effect changes in the form, mechanic’s liens are a topic near and dear to my heart as a construction attorney. This past month the Fairfax Circuit Court took on the intersection of mechanic’s lien priority under Virginia Code section 43-21 (the lien priority statute) and what constitute necessary parties that must be named in any enforcement suit. In Marines Plumbing, LLC v. Durbin, et al., the Court discussed an all too typical scenario. Marines Plumbing performed repair work on the defendants’ property and the defendants did not pay for the work. Marines Plumbing recorded a memorandum of lien and subsequently sued to enforce that lien. In filing its suit, Marines Plumbing failed to name the trustees and lender on a deed of trust securing the loan on the property. Needless to say, the Defendants moved to dismiss the action for failure to name necessary parties (lender and trustees). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    January 21, 2019 —
    Contractual waivers of consequential damages are important, whether they are mutual or one-sided. I believe in specificity in that the types of consequential damages that are waived should be detailed in the waiver of consequential damages provision. Standard form construction agreements provide a good template of the types of consequential damages that the parties are agreeing to waive. But, what if there is no specificity in the waiver of consequential damages provision? What if the provision just states that the parties mutually agree to waive consequential damages or that one party waives consequential-type damages against the other party? Let me tell you what would happen. The plaintiff will argue that the damages it seeks are general damages and are NOT waived by the waiver of consequential damages provision. The defendant, on the other hand, will argue that the damages are consequential in nature and, therefore, contractually waived. FOR THIS REASON, PARTIES NEED TO APPRECIATE WHAT DAMAGES ARE BEING WAIVED OR LIMITED, AND POTENTIALLY THOSE DAMAGES NOT BEING WAIVED OR LIMITED, WHEN AGREEING TO A WAIVER OF CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES PROVISION! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    US Appeals Court Slams FERC on Long-Muddled State Environmental Permits

    March 27, 2019 —
    What may be the nation’s largest dam removal project—delayed for years by regulatory and legal disputes of a utility, stakeholders and states over licensing and environmental permits—now may have new momentum after a hard-hitting January federal appeals court ruling. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, ENR and Debra K. Rubin, ENR Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recording “Un-Neighborly” Documents

    April 03, 2019 —
    In September 2018, in Baumgartner v. Timmins, 245 Ariz. 334, 429 P.3d 567, the Arizona Court of Appeals provided further clarification on what constitutes an “encumbrance” on a property for purposes of Arizona’s statutory scheme prohibiting the recording of “false documents.” The statute, A.R.S. § 33-420, prohibits the recording of documents that a person knows to be forged, are groundless, or that contain material misstatements (or false claims). A person who claims an “interest in, or a lien or encumbrance against” real property who records such documents can be held liable for $5,000 or treble the actual damages caused by the recording (whichever is greater), A.R.S. § 33-420(A), and perhaps even be found guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor, A.R.S. § 33-420(E). At issue in Baumgartner were neighbors fighting about CC&Rs—a typical neighborhood fight. In 2015, some of the neighbors filed suit against the Timminses for violating the CC&Rs. The Timminses did not contest the lawsuit, resulting in a default judgment. In what the Court of Appeals characterized as a lawsuit filed by the Timminses “in apparent response to the [first] lawsuit and resulting default judgment,” the Timminses created, signed, and recorded affidavits contending that the Plaintiffs in the original lawsuit were themselves “in violation of several provisions of the CC&Rs.” The Plaintiffs then filed suit again against the Timminses, this time contending that the Timminses had violated A.R.S. § 33-420 by recording the affidavits because the affidavits, the Plaintiffs contended, created encumbrances on their properties. The Apache County Superior Court agreed, and issued a final judgment nullifying the recorded documents and awarding the Timminses damages, along with their attorneys’ fees and costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob Henry, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Henry may be contacted at bhenry@swlaw.com

    Unpaid Hurricane Maria Insurance Claims, New Laws in Puerto Rico, and the Lesson for all Policyholders

    January 09, 2019 —
    Puerto Rico’s dire insurance situation more than a year after Hurricane Maria remains a constant reminder of why policyholders must diligently pursue their property and business interruption claims in the immediate aftermath of a storm. The numbers are staggering. On an island the approximate size of Connecticut, Hurricane Maria caused an estimated $100 billion in damage. According to the Office of the Insurance Commissioner of Puerto Rico, the hurricane resulted in more than 287,000 insurance claims. Roughly 11,000 of those claims, representing an estimated $2 billion in losses, remain unresolved. Reprinted courtesy of Walter J. Andrews , Hunton Andrews Kurth and Cary D. Steklof , Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Andrews may be contacted at wandrews@HuntonAK.com Mr. Steklof may be contacted at csteklof@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hunton Insurance Partner, Larry Bracken, Elected to the American College of Coverage Counsel

    March 04, 2019 —
    Lawrence J. Bracken II, a partner in Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Coverage practice group, has been elected to the American College of Coverage Counsel (ACCC), which is the preeminent association of U.S. and Canadian lawyers who represent the interests of insurers and policyholders. The ACCC’s mission is to advance the creative, ethical and efficient resolution of insurance coverage and extracontractual disputes; to enhance the civility and quality of the practice of insurance law; to provide peer-reviewed scholarship; and to improve the relationships among the members of our profession. The ACCC engages in a rigorous vetting process prior to inviting a lawyer to become a fellow. ACCC fellows include many of the most prominent members of the insurance law bar. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth
    Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com

    Courts Favor Arbitration in Two Recent Construction Dispute Cases

    November 21, 2018 —
    Recent court decisions have signaled the courts’ proclivity to prefer arbitration over full-fledged litigation when provisions in construction contracts are called into question. While the courts recognize a party’s constitutional right to a jury trial, the courts also lean strongly towards resolving disputes via arbitration as a matter of public policy, especially if a construction contract carves out arbitration as an alternative to litigation. In Avr Davis Raleigh v. Triangle Constr. Co., 818 S.E.2d 184 (N.C. App. 2018), the North Carolina Appeals Court reviewed the issue of whether the contracting parties selected binding arbitration as an alternative to litigation. The contract at issue was an AIA A201-2007 form document. Under the terms of the contract, the parties elected to arbitrate claims under $500,000 but to litigate claims over this amount. However, if there were several claims under $500,000 but the aggregate of all claims exceeded $500,000, then the contract implied that all claims would be arbitrated. Since the claims involved were an amalgamation of the two, the contracting parties disagreed about whether the arbitration provision would apply. The plaintiff interpreted this provision to mean litigation was mandatory when at least one claim exceeded $500,000 and that arbitration was mandatory when no single claim exceeded this amount. In contrast, the defendant interpreted this provision as meaning that when there were several claims worth less than $500,000 individually, but more than $500,000 aggregately, then all claims must be arbitrated. The trial court agreed with the plaintiff’s interpretation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Plaza, White & Williams LLP